with the latest win in Canada
If you are referring to the Df'd real-estate agent who lost his action against WT for effecting his ability to earn a living, that was IMO the correct outcome. A JW real-estate agent should not be relying on JW's as clients to provide his income.
The OP refers to representation or an advisor being present during a JC 'hearing'. As implied in one of the responses, if you don't want to hear the answer, don't ask the question. If asked if a lawyer or other representative may attend, elders will say NO.
As the person on trial and you wish to take some control, you then tell the elders in writing your conditions and requirements for you to attend a JC hearing. It then becomes their decision if they will comply to your requirements. If they do not wish to comply, they may drop the matter or they could proceed to DF you without you being there.
It's WT's club. WT sets the rules and conditions for membership. If you no longer wish to adhere to those requirements, they are within their rights to remove you from membership. To reduce legal action due to defamation or slander, real or implied, any announcement no longer states a person was removed (DF'd) or any reason, but only advises the congregation that the person is no longer a JW.